Techdirt. Stories filed under "rich and famous"Easily digestible tech news...https://www.techdirt.com/
en-usTechdirt. Stories filed under "rich and famous"https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/td-88x31.gifhttps://www.techdirt.com/Mon, 4 Nov 2013 14:02:01 PSTHackers Get Tons Of Detailed Info On Nearly 1 Million Rich & Famous By Copying Major Limo Broker Service's DatabaseMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131104/01365325114/hackers-get-tons-detailed-info-nearly-1-million-rich-famous-copying-major-limo-broker-services-database.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131104/01365325114/hackers-get-tons-detailed-info-nearly-1-million-rich-famous-copying-major-limo-broker-services-database.shtmlbroken into the computer system for CorporateCarOnline, a service that brokers limos around the US, and grabbed a copy of their database -- which appears to include a ton of information. This includes names, details and financial info on tons of A-list celebrities, sports stars and politicians. Krebs discloses some of the "notes" associated with some people, including LeBron James, Tom Hanks, Donald Trump, Aaron Rodgers, Rep. John Conyers, Senator Mark Udall and others. The note on Conyers apparently said: "Meet and Greet Baggage Claim. US Congressman. A DFTU situation," which Krebs suspects stands for "don't fuck this up."

However, as Krebs notes, the database could be a field day for tabloids (and, one assumes, blackmailers), because the notes associated with certain passengers for things they may have done in those limos can, at times, be embarrassing.

Any two-bit tabloid would have an absolute field day with this database. Simple text searches for certain words (“sex,” “puke,” “arrest,” “police,” “smoking pot”) reveal dozens of records detailing misbehavior and all kinds of naughtiness by executives, celebrities and people you might otherwise expect to behave civilly.

For example, the following is an explanation taken from a limo reservation made back in May 2006 by a woman working for MTV. The limo in question was actually a stretch Hummer with capacity to seat 14 passengers, and was rented for the occasion of visiting a series of wineries in Long Island, NY. When the stretch Hummer returned to the shop after disgorging its passengers, the fleet’s owners discovered that the vehicle had been plastered with cheese slices and crackers, and that someone had left behind a sex toy

And, with that, you have to imagine that TMZ, Gawker and others just started trying to figure out how they get their hands on this database...

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>a-treasure-trovehttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20131104/01365325114Fri, 15 Feb 2013 13:41:15 PSTIt's Fine For The Rich & Famous To Use Kickstarter; Bjork's Project Failed Because It Was LameMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130214/03052121969/its-fine-rich-famous-to-use-kickstarter-bjorks-project-failed-because-it-was-lame.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130214/03052121969/its-fine-rich-famous-to-use-kickstarter-bjorks-project-failed-because-it-was-lame.shtmlcomplain when the "rich and famous" made use of platforms like Kickstarter. That story was about Tom Hanks' son Colin looking for funds to complete a documentary. As we noted, it made perfect sense to use Kickstarter, since it's also a nice marketing platform and a way to connect with fans. I don't understand why this seems to get people up in arms, but it continues to this day. You may have heard about the high profile failure of Bjork's Kickstarter campaign. She sought £375,000 not for a new album, but to make a port of her last album's app, Biophillia, from iOS to Android and Windows 8. The original Biophilia won some rave reviews for pushing the boundaries of what an album was... but also was widely criticized for being platform specific to iOS. When it came out, Bjork said she hoped that those on other platforms would just "pirate" it, but we never understood why she didn't release it on multiple platforms.

Apparently, the answer was that however the app was designed, it would be insanely expensive to port to other platforms. That seems like much more of a design mistake than anything else. It seems likely that her project failed for a few key reasons, including that it was just about porting an app that came out years ago, rather than anything new. Also, the "rewards" were somewhat unimpressive. And, of course, Bjork fans who were iPhone users had little reason to contribute as well. There's also the big one: unlike some other stars, Bjork really hasn't embraced connecting and communicating with her fans. That's her choice, of course. No one says she needs to. But, it's much harder to raise a ton of crowdfunded money that way.

Still, many are saying that the project failed because she's rich and famous and could have just paid for everything herself. But that seems silly. There are plenty of ways that the rich and famous can make use of crowdfunding and plenty of reasons why it makes sense to do so. The project failed because it was a bad project for crowdfunding, and because Bjork isn't necessarily connected with her fans in a way that makes sense for crowdfunding.

crowdfunding should, by its very nature, be available to EVERYBODY....

here's what i think: THE MARKET IS EFFICIENT.

if ANYBODY wants to give a go at having the community help them with a project, that’s the ARTISTS prerogative. if it fails, then the interest wasn't there.

it should't matter if it's justin bieber, obama, the new kids of the block reunion project, lance armstrong, oprah, or the friendless 18-year old down the street who's been hiding in his bedroom making EDM music.
ANYBODY CAN ASK. that's democracy.

and since crowdfunding is – by definition – in the hands of the community: THE COMMUNITY WILL DETERMINE WHETHER A PROJECT IS SUCCESSFUL.

And yet, people still get upset. To some extent, this feels a bit like "hipsterism." People feel that these platforms are special because the rich and famous haven't necessarily discovered them yet. But why is it so wrong if they do find them and do use them? If people want to support the projects they will, and if they don't, they won't. That's what makes these platforms so useful.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>moving-on...https://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130214/03052121969Fri, 8 Feb 2008 04:55:00 PSTLuxury Mobile Operator Not So Luxurious Any MoreMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080207/062342195.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080207/062342195.shtmlfor the rich and famous in the US. The selling point had little to do with a fancy phone. You would get just a common RAZR. But, for a $1500 entry fee and $500/month (!?!) you would basically get unlimited calls, get a new phone each year and get a full-time concierge service. It's not difficult to recognize why this is a terrible idea. The people who could afford this sort of thing are probably smart enough to recognize they can simply buy themselves a new phone each year and sign up for an unlimited (or close to it) service from one of the big carriers. As for the concierge service, there are plenty of those around -- with most being a lot more established and trustworthy. Soon after launch, the company discovered that no one had signed up. So it dropped prices to a $1000 entry fee and $400/month. That didn't work either. So a year later, it dropped prices again to $500 entry and $200/month. Stunningly, it turns out that the rich and famous are still smart enough to recognize that's not a very good deal either. Well, other than about 2,000 people who actually did sign up. That's really not enough customers to run a business like this, so the company has shut down completely. Amusingly, the way the COO found out the company was shutting down was that his phone stopped working. As Engadget points out, you would think that the Chief Operating Officer would know that the company's operations were being shut down. Apparently not.